§

Canegie-Illinois Steel Corp.

95 N.L.R.B. 763 (N.L.R.B. 1951)
Canegie-Illinois Steel Corp.

11 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Mackay Co.

    304 U.S. 333 (1938)   Cited 534 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer may replace striking workers with others to carry on business so long as the employer is not guilty of unfair labor practices

  2. Packard Co. v. Labor Board

    330 U.S. 485 (1947)   Cited 381 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Board determinations of unit issues involves a "large measure of informed discretion."

  3. Republic Steel Corp. v. Labor Board

    311 U.S. 7 (1940)   Cited 231 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In Republic Steel, supra, the Court refused to enforce an order requiring the employer to pay the full amount of back pay to an employee who had been paid to work for the Work Projects Administration in the meantime.

  4. Labor Board v. Atkins Co.

    331 U.S. 398 (1947)   Cited 79 times
    Holding that employer-employee relationship is determined by power to set wages and hours, coupled with the financial burden of the wages and receipt of the benefits of the work, as well as the absolute power to hire and fire or the power to control all the activities of the worker

  5. Labor Board v. Fruehauf Co.

    301 U.S. 49 (1937)   Cited 35 times

    CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. Nos. 420 and 421. Argued February 11, 1937. Decided April 12, 1937. The National Labor Relations Act, and orders made under it by the National Labor Relations Board, sustained upon the authority of National Labor Relations Board v. Jones Laughlin Steel Corp., ante, p. 1, as applied to a manufacturer of commercial "trailers," (vehicles designed for the transportation of merchandise), having its factory in Michigan, but which obtained

  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Illinois Tool Works

    153 F.2d 811 (7th Cir. 1946)   Cited 47 times
    Noting that the test for violations of sec. 8, now codified as sec. 8, of the NLRA is whether "the employer engaged in conduct which, it may reasonably be said, tends to interfere with the free exercise of employee rights under the Act," and that actual or successful coercion need not be shown in order for the Board to find a violation

  7. National Labor Rel. Board v. Kennametal, Inc.

    182 F.2d 817 (3d Cir. 1950)   Cited 26 times

    No. 10113. Argued May 5, 1950. May 24, 1950. Mozart G. Ratner, Washington, D.C. (David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Thomas McDermott, National Labor Relations Board, all of Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. William B. Paul, Pittsburgh, Pa. (John C. Hill, Paul, Lawrence Wills, Pittsburgh, Pa., on the brief), for respondent. Before MARIS, GOODRICH and HASTIE, Circuit Judges. GOODRICH, Circuit Judge. This petition for enforcement of an order

  8. Eastern Coal Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    176 F.2d 131 (4th Cir. 1949)   Cited 20 times

    No. 5822. Argued April 13, 1949. Decided June 13, 1949. Petition by Eastern Coal Corporation to review and set aside an order of the National Labor Relations Board. Petition denied and order enforced. William A. Stuart, Abingdon, Va. (George Richardson, Jr., Bluefield, W. Va., on the brief), for petitioner. William J. Avrutis and Frederick U. Reel, Attorneys, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. (David P. Findling, Associate General Counsel, and A. Norman Somers, Assistant General Counsel

  9. Albrecht v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    181 F.2d 652 (7th Cir. 1950)   Cited 8 times

    No. 10012. May 2, 1950. Abraham W. Brussell, Milton I. Shadur, Chicago, Ill. (Milton L. Ray, Chicago, Ill., Goldberg, Devoe Brussell, Chicago, Ill., of counsel), for petitioners. David P. Findling, Associate General Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Assistant General Counsel, Norton J. Come, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., Frederick U. Reel, Maurice Alexandre, Attorneys, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for respondent. Paul R. Conaghan, Chicago, Ill., Knapp,

  10. EDWARDS v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION ET AL

    189 P.2d 124 (Utah 1948)   Cited 4 times

    No. 7089. Decided February 4, 1948. 1. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION. When an aggrieved party has been granted a rehearing, receives an adverse decision thereon by Industrial Commission, and files subsequent application for further rehearing timely, commission has jurisdiction to entertain second application and may grant or deny second application. Utah Code 1943, 42-1-76, 42-1-77. 2. WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION. Aggrieved party who has been granted a rehearing by Industrial Commission need not file a second